eh? Samsung already makes more money selling their own mobile devices (#1 in SmartPhone sales last quarter and #1 in all mobile devices worldwide last year), so why bother improving someone else's technology & securing their supplies?
Uh? because Samsung makes way more money from their parts than they do from their trash phones.
Uh… because Samsung makes way more money from their parts than they do from their trash phones.
Number one in smartphone sales?
It seems like Samsung doesn't make more money from parts, but thanks to apple, having to depend on Samsung for display / cpus, their semiconductor business profit margin is higher, according to Samsung's 2011 Q2 statement:
The iPad's dpi is 132, not 80. (1024pixels/7.75" or 768pixels/5.8") Doubling the screen dpi to 264, while leaning towards high end, is not bleeding edge technology. Which really makes me wonder about the validity of this report.
By the way, the newest Kindle is 175dpi, the older Kindle 2 is 167dpi.
Thanks for putting me right on that. Yes, 264 dpi would be a thoroughly worthwhile improvement over 132. If it's already doable, maybe Apple is looking at a resolution higher than 264, which is why it has experienced problems?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
And a Newton in 1993. And many devices before even then.
I thought the same thing, but just assumed he meant multi-touch screens.
Yes, obviously.
This discussion makes me wonder when regular 13"-15" Apple laptops will get hi res screens with an equivalent resolution?
Thanks for putting me right on that. Yes, 264 dpi would be a thoroughly worthwhile improvement over 132. If it's already doable, maybe Apple is looking at a resolution higher than 264, which is why it has experienced problems?
doubling 1280x1024 to 2560x2048 would turn out a 337.98 PPI, so something squarely between those 2 resolutions would be exactly 300 PPI. Actually,. 2304*1792 would be 300.91. That's a really weird resolution tho, I think a straight doubling would be easier than that, but it still sounds like it's difficult.
Speaking of the Macs, resolution independence is not yet a feature of OS X so until it is, super high res monitors aren't very likely. They could certainly improve on the low res screen on the 13" MBP tho. I mean, even the MBA has a higher resolution.
If the argument goes that Samsung possess irreplaceable engineers that can make the best screens, then surely offering those engineers well paid jobs with Apple is a good use of the 80 BILLION DOLLARS Apple has. Maybe phase two of Tim Cooks component supply plan is to buy up the human talent.
Whilst it is true LG and other suppliers also have tablet products, they don't seem to flout the relationship as much as Samsung.
But, if you tempted the engineering talent away, then you get a double benefit - better screens for Apple, AND Samsung can't use those talents for themselves either. Now THAT'S the way to apply the thumb screws.
Comments
eh? Samsung already makes more money selling their own mobile devices (#1 in SmartPhone sales last quarter and #1 in all mobile devices worldwide last year), so why bother improving someone else's technology & securing their supplies?
Uh? because Samsung makes way more money from their parts than they do from their trash phones.
Number one in smartphone sales?
Uh… because Samsung makes way more money from their parts than they do from their trash phones.
Number one in smartphone sales?
It seems like Samsung doesn't make more money from parts, but thanks to apple, having to depend on Samsung for display / cpus, their semiconductor business profit margin is higher, according to Samsung's 2011 Q2 statement:
Digital Media & Appliances : $14B - $500M profit
Telecomm (smartphone) : $12B - $1.6B profit
Total = $26B
Part/Component busines:
Display Panel Business: $7B - ($200M) loss
Semiconductor: $9B - $1.8B profit
Total = $16B
Digital Media & Appliances : $14B - $500M profit
Telecomm (smartphone) : $12B - $1.6B profit
Total = $26B
Part/Component busines:
Display Panel Business: $7B - ($200M) loss
Semiconductor: $9B - $1.8B profit
Total = $16B
So who else buys displays from Samsung?
Also, you made the right call in deleting what you deleted.
So who else buys displays from Samsung?
Also, you made the right call in deleting what you deleted.
eh? This should shut you up then..
Samsung Telecomm has the highest revenue and profit margin.
Bussiness
Telecomm 14.90 2.52
DM&A 14.36 0.25
Total: 29.26
Parts:
Semiconductor 9.48 1.59
DP 7.08 0.05
Total: 16.48
The iPad's dpi is 132, not 80. (1024pixels/7.75" or 768pixels/5.8") Doubling the screen dpi to 264, while leaning towards high end, is not bleeding edge technology. Which really makes me wonder about the validity of this report.
By the way, the newest Kindle is 175dpi, the older Kindle 2 is 167dpi.
Thanks for putting me right on that. Yes, 264 dpi would be a thoroughly worthwhile improvement over 132. If it's already doable, maybe Apple is looking at a resolution higher than 264, which is why it has experienced problems?
And a Newton in 1993. And many devices before even then.
I thought the same thing, but just assumed he meant multi-touch screens.
Yes, obviously.
This discussion makes me wonder when regular 13"-15" Apple laptops will get hi res screens with an equivalent resolution?
Thanks for putting me right on that. Yes, 264 dpi would be a thoroughly worthwhile improvement over 132. If it's already doable, maybe Apple is looking at a resolution higher than 264, which is why it has experienced problems?
doubling 1280x1024 to 2560x2048 would turn out a 337.98 PPI, so something squarely between those 2 resolutions would be exactly 300 PPI. Actually,. 2304*1792 would be 300.91. That's a really weird resolution tho, I think a straight doubling would be easier than that, but it still sounds like it's difficult.
Speaking of the Macs, resolution independence is not yet a feature of OS X so until it is, super high res monitors aren't very likely. They could certainly improve on the low res screen on the 13" MBP tho. I mean, even the MBA has a higher resolution.
Whilst it is true LG and other suppliers also have tablet products, they don't seem to flout the relationship as much as Samsung.
But, if you tempted the engineering talent away, then you get a double benefit - better screens for Apple, AND Samsung can't use those talents for themselves either. Now THAT'S the way to apply the thumb screws.
Who would you rather work for?